A global estimate of the absolute oceanic general circulation from a geostrophic inversion of in situ hydrographic data is tested against and then combined with an estimate obtained from TOPEX/POSEIDON altimetric data and a geoid model computed using the JGM-3 gravity-field solution. Within the quantitative uncertainties of both the hydrographic inversion and the geoid estimate, the two estimates derived by very different methods are consistent. When the in situ inversion is combined with the altimetry/geoid scheme using a recursive inverse procedure, a new solution, fully consistent with both hydrography and altimetry, is found. There is, however, little reduction in the uncertainties of the calculated ocean circulation and its mass and heat fluxes because the best available geoid estimate remains noisy relative to the purely oceanographic inferences. The conclusion drawn from this is that the comparatively large errors present in the existing geoid models now limit the ability of satellite altimeter data to improve directly the general ocean circulation models derived from in situ measurements. Because improvements in the geoid could be realized through a dedicated spaceborne gravity recovery mission, the impact of hypothetical much better, future geoid estimates on the circulation uncertainty is also quantified, showing significant hypothetical reductions in the uncertainties of oceanic transport calculations. Full ocean general circulation models could better exploit both existing oceanographic data and future gravity-mission data, but their present use is severely limited by the inability to quantify their error budgets.

plus-circle Add Review

comment

Reviews